PELING 


Reformer: 


PUBLTSHT  IN  THE  INTEREST  OV 
A SIMPLIFIED  ORTHOGRAFY  FOR  THE  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE. 

PRINTED  ON  THE  ANGLO-AMERICAN  BASIS,  VIZ  : 

No  new  leterz,  hut  eech  leter  and  digraf  ov  the  comon  alfahet 
employ d iu  denote  its  most  usual  sound. 

Buenz  & Co.,  PUBLISHEEZ,  33  Paek  Kow,  New  Yoek. 

ELIZA  B.  BURNZ,  EDITOR. 


Ishued  Munihly,  at  so  sents  a yeer:  three  copiz,  ^7. 

VoL  L ^RCH,  1878.  No.  3. 


THE  DUTY  OV  LITERARY  MEN. 

AN  ADDRES 

BEFORE  THE  INDIANAPOLIS  BRANCH  OV  THE  SOSIETY  OF  ALUMNI  OV  THE  INDIANA 
ASBURY  UNIVERSITY,  \ 

BY  REV.  T.  A.  GOODWIN,  A.  M. 

The  theem  ov  this  evening  shal  be  the  duty  we  5 [owe]  tn  the  wnrld  az 
an  assosiashon  ov  literary  jentlmen.  The  relashon  we  snstane  tn  the 
foremost  university  in  the  grate  Mississipi  valy,  no  les  than  onr  per- 
sonal amez,  forbidz  that  we  shhd  devote  onr  time  holely  tn  snch  snb- 
jects  az  may  simply  entertane  or  amuze  ns  individCialy.  The  wnrld  haz 
a dame  npon  ns  in  this  assosiated  capasity  no  les  than  in  onr  private 
or  profeshonal  wanks,  and  it  haz  a rite  tn  command  onr  servisez  in 
whotever  may  tend  tn  devate  the  milionz,  whether  that  be  by  lifting 
them  tn  a hyer  plane,  or  by  simply  remooving  snch  bnrdenz  az  whd 
prevent  thare  lifting  themselvz.  Posibly,  in  this  age  ov  phsh  it  may 
not  be  required  ov  ns  that  we  neglect  onr  biznes'  tn  go  a forajing  for 
rongz  npon  which  tn  devote  onr  enerjyz,  bnt  we  dare  not  withhold 
onr  ade  when  onr  iez  [eyes]  behold  an  oppreshon  which  pervadez 
every  rank  ov  sosiety,  inflicting  its  crueltyz  alike  npon  inosent  child- 
^^iid  and  venerabl  age,  not  sparing  male  or  female  in  the  intermediate 
^tagez  ; oppresing  the  laboring  man  and  the  man  ov  leterz,  and  th 
biznes  man.  It  iz  foly  for  eny  ov  ns  tn  atfect  egzemshon  from  snch  a 
rong,  notwithstanding  onr  soshal  and  literary  standing  mite  indicate 
tn  ntherz  that  we  snffer  very  litl,  if  eny,  from  it.  No  dont  we  doo 
snfer  les  than  snm.  We  sertenly  hav  pade  ennf  in  time  and  mnny  tn 
dame  at  leest  a parshal  egzemshon,  if  eny  can,  yet  we  anl  snffer  ennf 
tn  caul  forth  our  most  ernest  efforts,  oven  if  acting  from  purely  selfish 


2 


mStivz,  and  no  manly  simpathy  moovd  us  in  hehaf  ov  suffering  mil- 
ionz.  No  literary  man  hoo  appreshiates  hiz  oportunityz  can  be  indif- 
ferent tu  a rong  which  s6riusly  affects  literary  acquirements,  and 
every  form  ov  biznes  life  abuv  the  loest  grade  ov  mere  musculer  ap- 
plicashon. 

AN  OLD  AND  JIANT  EONG. 


It  wild  be  unwurthy  ov  us,  waring  ttie  onor-  ov  our  alma  mater  and 
remembering  the  sucsesez  ov  our  erly  struglzT  tu  hezitate  now,  when 
every  considerashon  ov  humanity  caulz  us  tu  contribute  tu  over- 
thro  ov  a jiant  rong,  tu  pleed  that  that  rong  iz  old  and  interwoven  in 
every  department  ov  literature  and  biznes.  Neether  age,  nor  strength, 
nor  ubiquity  can  sanctify  a rong,  nor  be  allowd  tu  pleed  egzemshon 
from  assault.  Suppoze  even  that  sucses  iz  sertenly  a grate  1vay  off, 
that  iz  no  apolojy  for  indififerens  or  inacshon.  The  heroz  ov  the  wurld 
have  seldom  bin  men  ov  dash,  and  very  few  acheevments  in  the  moral 
or  material  wurld  wurth  naming  hav  bin  accomplisht  sudenly.  It  iz 
die  pashent,  ploding  wun,  hoo  winz  in  the  batl  ov  life.  Wilberforce 
nd  Clarkson  did  not  shrink  from  assaling  slavery  becauz  slavery  woz 
strongly  intrencht  in  the  soshal,  political  and  commershal  interests 
ov  Great  Britain.  It  woz  enuf  for  theez  heroz  tu  no  that  slavery  woz 
rong  tu  indicate  thare  duty.  At  ferst  thay  wer  aulmost  alone,  but 
diay  wer  not  tu  be  responsibl  for  rezults  ; hens,  beleeving  that  Truth 
and  wun  constitutes  a majority  in  eny  good  cauz  thay”  began  thare  wurk. 
Neether  wer  thay  discuraged  becauz  utherz  had  faled,  nor  becauz  yeer 
after  yeer  past  before  thay  saw  eny  vizibl  frutes  ov  thare  laborz.  Thay 
began  becauz  thay  aut  tu,  and  thay  continued,  notwithstanding  dis- 
curagement,  and  thay  livd  tu  see  slavery  abolisht  in  aul  ov  Great 
Britain  in  les  than  forty  yeerz,  and  in  les  than  a hundred  yeerz  thare 
woz  not  a slave  in  the  United  States. 


ENGLISH  OETHOGEAET  A SLAVE  POWEE. 

We  ar  cauld  az  literary  men  tu  resl  with  a more  formidabl  rong  than 
African  Slavery  ever  woz.  In  its  wurst  ^zez  sumthing  giid  ciid  be 
sed  in  mitigashon  if  not  in  justificashon  ov  that  grate  bloch  upon 
English  and  American  sivilizashon.  It  woz  at  leest  profitabl  tu  the 
slaveholderz.  The  fo  which  demandz  our  attenshon  iz  a fo  tu  aul. 
It  oppresez  aul,  it  impoverishez  aul,  and  enrichez  nun.  It  beginz 
with  the  child  in  th3  nursery,  it  dogz  him  throo  hiz  scool  dayz,  it  be- 
sets hiz  path  throo  colege,  and  torments  him  amidst  hiz  gratest  suc- 
sesez in  the  profeshonal  and  literary  pursutes  ov  mature  life  ; and  that 
enemy  iz  the  Speling  Biik. 

The  bare  menshon  ov  the  speling  biik  shiid  arouz  the  richus  indig- 


3 


nashon  ov  every  scolar.  Ifc  sudjests  yeers  ov  perplexity  and  toil,  widi 
at  best  but  parshal  sucses.  Not  wun  ov  yoo  can  spel  correctly,  tho 
meny  ov  yoo  hav  attaned  enviabl  eminens  in  yoor  several  caulings, 
and  thoze  ov  yoo  boo  spel  witb  even  tolerabl  correctnes  doo  it  at  grate 
expens  ov  time  and  labor.  A literary  jentlman  ov  no  meen  reputa- 
shon,  asserts  that  be  baz  spent  more  than  too  yeerz  ov  biz  literary  life 
in  consiilting  the  dicsbonary  on  speling  alone.  It  wild  surprize  eny 
wun  boo  baz  not  bin  in  pozisbon  tu  obzerv,  tu  lern  bow  very  few 
™ spel  correctly.  In  an  editorial  life  ov  foreteen  yeerz,  with  corre- 
spondents amung  the  most  eminent  lawyerz,  doctorz,  ministerz, 
educatorz,  politisbanz  and  biznes  men,  I seldom  found  wun  booz 
manuscript  did  not  need  the  correcting  band  ov  the  “ compozitor.  ” 
Blesed  compozitor  ! He  iz  the  editor’z  frend  az  wel  az  the  frend  ov 
the  corespondent ; and  compozitorz  ar  the  only  men  az  a clas  boo 
uniformly  spel  with  even  tolerabl  correctnes,  and  the  wel  tbumd  dic- 
sbonary ov  the  compozing  room  attests  the  labor  spent  in  acquiring 
the  art,  and  bow  tu  the  last  the  oldest  and  best  ov  them  distrust  thare 
ability  tu  conform  tu  the  wbimz  ov  the  tirant. 


CEUELTY  TO  CHILDKEN. 


The  cruel  mokery  which  this  tirant  inflicts  upon  trustful  cbildbiid 
iz  not  the  leest  ov  the  outrajez  which  the  speling  biik  perpetrates.  It 
beginz  with  flie  ferst  leson  in  speling  and  never  lets  up  tbroo  the 
longest  life.  When  the  child  baz  commited  tu  memory  the  ferst  and 
simplest  task,  b-a,  ha ; b-e,  be ; b-i,  hi ; b-o,  ho  ; b-u,  hu ; b-y , hy  ; be 
aut  tu  feel  that  be  baz  lernd  sumtbing,  but  he  baz  not.  If  the  teecher 
pronounsez  this  silabl,  “ by,”  be  cannot  tel  for  flie  life  ov  him  which 
“bi”  be  iz  tu  spel,  whether  b-i  or  b-y  ; and  he  iz  tu  lern  shortly  that 
be  iz  stil  more  at  a los,  for  it  may  be  b-ii-y,  or  b-y-e,  or  b-a-y,  az  wel 
as  b-i  or  b-y.  He  can  cum  within  fore  ov  it  after  much  labor.  He  baz 
lernd  tu  spel  “ba,”but  be  iz  tu  discuver  soon  that  be  duz  not  no 
which  “ba,”  whether  b-a,  or  b-a-y,  or  b-e-y,  or  b-e-i  ; and  plane  “be” 
may  be  b-ee,  or  b-e-a  az  wel  az  b-e  ; and  “bo”  may  be  b-e-a-u,  or 
b-o-w,  or  b-o-a,  az  wel  az  b-o  ; and  “ bu  ” may  be  b-e-a-u  or  b-u-e  az 
k wel  az  b-u.  Iz  thare  eny  uther  tirant  on  ertb  boo  baz  three,  or  fore, 
or  five  wayz  ov  dooing  a thing,  boo  inflicts  a punishment  for  dooing 
it  wun  way  when  biz  caprees  demanded  anuther  way  for  that  partic- 
ular occazion.  Yet  the  child  or  the  man  boo  spelz  “ by  ” the  rong  way 
iz  held  in  contemt — iz  punisht  for  his  ignorans  aul  biz  life. 

But  this  iz  not  the  wurst.  This  unsuspecting  pursuer  ov  nolege 
under  dificultiz  iz  sbure  tu  lern  that  be  can  never  tel — never  tu  the 
day  ov  biz  detb,  tho  be  becum  the  most  eminent  ov  men — wbot  b-o-w, 


4 


or  s-o-w,  or  r-e-a-d,  or  t-e-a-r,  and  meny  uther  combinashonz  ov  leteraj 
spel,  without  reding  bakwerdz  or  forwerdz  or  both,  tu  gather  from  the 
conecshon  what  thay  aut  tu  spel.  He  lernz  by  and  by  that  sumtimez 
the  tirant  requires  him  tu  uze  a-i  for  plane  a az  in  jail,  but  that  a-i  iz 
a substitute  for  e in  said  and  i in  aisle ; so  e-o  becumz  e in  people,  o in 
yeoman,  u in  pidgeon  ; and  o-e  iz  o in  foe,  u in  does ; o-u-g-h  iz  o in 
dough,  00  in  through,  uf  in  tough,  auf  in  trough,  ou  in  plough. 

WHOT  MAKES  THIS  SLAVEBY  POSIBL  ? 

The  slave  hoo  obayz  a cruel  master  without  suspecting  that  the  ex- 
acshonz  ar  outrajus  iz  more  tu  be  pitid  than  the  more  sensitiv  and 
more  sensibl  wun  hoo  chafes  under  the  outrage  and  rezolvz  tu  be 
free  and  tu  help  utherz  to  be  free  aulso.  It  iz  therfore  no  compli- 
ment tu  yoo  that  aul  thezeyeerz  yoo  hav  bin  required  tu  expres  the  long 
sound  ov  0 in  more  than  twenty  ways,  and  yet  neether  new  it  or  cared 
for  it.  It  iz  such  stupidity  that  makes  slavery  posibl.  It  iz  tu  caul 
yoor  attenshon  to  such  outrajez,  and  thus,  if  posibl,  tu  enlist  yoor 
simpathy  in  behaf  ov  thoze  hoo  intend  tu  be  free,  that  I hav  chozen 
this  theem  for  yoor  considerashon,  tho  fiily  aware  that  sum  ov  yoo  wil 
continue  tu  hug  yoor  chanez  az  ov  bid,  and  probably  even  make  an 
effort  tu  defend  and  approov  the  exacshonz  ov  yoor  master.  And 
now  so  insensibl  ar  yoo  tu  yoor  one  [own]  sufferings, diat  it  iz  nesesery 
tu  giv  yoo  proof  ov  this  before  yoo  wil  beleev  that  yoo  hav  even  bin  so 
treeted.  Ferst,  ther  iz  plane  o,  then  ther  ar  o-h  and  o-w-e  for  5 alone  ; 
then  yoo  hav  o-w  in  blow,  o-l  in  folk,  k-o  in  know,  o-o  in  door,  e-w-e  in 
ewe,  o-e  in  foe,  e-a-u  in  beau,  h-o  in  ghost,  e-w  in  sew,  o-u-g-h,  in  dough, 
w-o-1  in  wholly,  w-o-e  in  whole,  o-a  in  coal,  e-o  in  yeoman,  o-l  in  roll,  o-u 
in  court,  w-o  in  sword,  a-u  in  hautboy,  and  probably  several  utherz 
which  doo  not  now  occur  tu  me.*  And  nerely  the  same  may  be  sed 
ov  the  different  wayz  ov  expressing  the  soundz  ov  the  uther  vowelz. 
Iz  it  eny  wunder  then  that  no  man  but  a wurd-bilder  in  the  printing 
offis  can  ever  lern  tu  spel  our  language,  and  that  not  wun  in  a thouz. 
and  ov  even  wurd-bilderz  ever  so  lernz  it  az  tu  be  able  tu  dispens  with 
the  speling  biik,  tho  thay  hav  dun  nuthing  els  than  spel  for  forty  or 
fifty  yeerz  ? | 

The  evilz  ov  this  outrajus  sistem  ov  speling,  (if  eny  thing  so  arbi- 
trary and  caprishus  can  be  cauld  a sistem, ) ar  innumerabl.  It  not 
only  requirez  yeerz  tu  lern  whot  shiid  be  lernd  in  az  meny  munths, 


*Prof.  Ellis  haz  shone  in  his  “ Plea”  that  the  letter  a haz  7 different  soundz  e,  j 
i,  6 o,  11  •,  and  that  the  long  sound  ov  e is  represented  in  40  different  combinashons 
or  leterz,  a by  34  and  o by  34. 


and  harasez  its  victim  throo  life  with  a constant  convicshon  that  he  iz 
aul  die  time  liabl  tu  mistakes,  but,  more  than  eny  thing  els,  it  standz 
in  the  way  ov  acquiring  our  language  by  forenerz.  For  that  mater 
meny  a fine  English  scolar  never  pronounsez  aul  hiz  wurdz  correctly. 
Wun  ov  the  best  preecherz  we  ever  had  in  Indiana,  (and  so  eminent 
a scolar  that  he  iz  recognized  az  wun  ov  die  ablest  prezidents  our 
alma  mater  ever  had,)  woz  accustomd  tu  reed  from  the  Samz  that 
“The  wicked  wauk  in  a vane  shoo, ” az  if  the  shooz  [shoes]  ov  the 
wicked  differd  from  thoze  ov  the  richus  ; and  yoo  hav  ofen  bin  invited 
by  yoor  pastor  to  attend  the  suing  society  at  such  a time  and  plase ; 
and  the  literary  wurld  iz  now  aul  torn  up  over  die  important  question 
whether  “ either”  shud  be  pronounst  eether  or  iether. 

A LEJUN  ov  “BUTS.” 

The  majority  ov  thinking  men,  upon  a prezentashon  ov  this  sub- 
ject, admit  the  nesesity  ov  a reform,  but — But  whot  ? Away  with  yoor 
“ buts ” in  a case  like  this.  “But”  iz  the  wurd  ov  cowards  and  slug- 
ards,  and  iz  unwurthy  a sun  ov  bid  Asbury  University.  It  iz  un- 
wurthy  eny  enlitend  American  scolar  when  applied  tu  a subject  which 
promisez  so  much  tu  the  wurld  az  this  reform  in  speling  promisez. 
When  a Swis  pezant,  fifty  yeerz  ago,  sudjested  die  bilding  ov  a tunel 
under  Mount  Cenis,  the  hole  wurld  exclam ed  that  wild  be  a gud  thing 
if  it  cud  be  dun,  “but” — and  if  ther  had  bin  no  plukyer  men  than 
theez  “but”-erz,  that  tunel  wild  never  hav  bin  bilt.  For  thouzandz 
ov  yeerz  .the  commers  ov  the  wurld  had  cast  a longing  luk  acros  the 
Ismus  ov  Suez,  yet  it  continued  tu  sale  around  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
becauz  ther  wer  so  meny  “buts”  in  the  way,  until  pluky  France 
determined  tu  bvercum  them  aul.  Ther  woz  hardly  an  American  a 
hundred  yeerz  ago  that  did  not  beleev  that  nashonal  independens 
wild  be  a giid  thing,  yet  thouzandz  ov  them  encuraged  the  enemy  and 
weekened  the  patriots  by  thare  eternal  din  ov  “buts.”  Wilberforce 
and  Clarkson,  and  Garrison,  and  Sumner,  and  Giddings,  faut  thare 
batlz  agenst  slavery  amidst  a perfect  storm  ov  “buts.”  The  truth  iz 
that  ever  sins  thoze  ten  explbrerz  came  bak  from  Canaan  and  reported 
tu  Moses  that  die  land  woz  giid  enuf,  and  frutefiil  enuf,  ‘ ‘ but  ” — the  cow- 
ardly “ but”-erz  hav  bin  numericaly  about  az  ten  tu  too  ; the  Calebz 
and  the  Joshuaz  not  only  having  tu  fite  the  batlz,  but  tu  cary  the  lode 
ov  feerfiil  and  fant-harted  wunz  hoo  wish  wel,  — “but.” 

THE  ETIMOLOJICAIi  OBJECSHUN. 

Only  a wurd  or  too  need  be  devoted  tu  a considerashon  ov  the  ob- 
staclz  in  the  way  ov  reforming  our  speling.  In  the  ferst  plase  ther 


6 


ar  a few  hoo  affect  a wunderfiilreverens  for  whot  thay  caul  the  historic 
caracter  ov  our  language  ; and  thay  feer  that  a uniform  method  ov 
speling  wild  destroy  aul  this.  Thare  feerz  ar  groundles  ; but  suppoze 
it  shiid,  hoo  carez  ? Ov  aul  pitiabl  caracterz  on  erth  ther  iz  only  wun 
more  tu  be  pitid  than  the  lothsum  sion  ov  sum  playd  out  aristocratic 
family  hoo  clamez  speshal  recognishon  becauz  hiz  father  woz  Lord 
This  Wun,  or  hiz  grandfather  woz  Duke  That  Wun  ; and  that  more 
tu  be  pitid  wun  iz  the  haf-starvd  pedant  hoo  findz  food  intelectual  in 
diging  after  the  roots  ov  comon  or  uncomon  wurdz.  It  iz  only  in  shody 
sosiety  that  men  ar  tu  be  found 

Hooz  therd  ansestral  thay  dare  not  assend. 

For  feer  thay  find  it  waxt  at  the  uther  end. 

The  jenuin  American  jentlman  carez  but  litl  for  pedigree.  Hoo- 
ever  acts  wel  hiz  part  iz  the  man  for  American  nobility.  So  with  our 
wurdz.  Hoo  cares  whether  eny  given  wurd  be  a literary  Melchisa- 
dec,  az  our  wurdz  “ skedadl  ” or  “biildoze  ” without  an  ansestry,  or 
a derivativ  from  the  Latin,  or  the  Greek,  or  the  Choctaw,  or  the 
Chinese?  Ther  iz  absolutely  nuthing  in  this  historical  objecshon. 
But  suppoze  it  tu  be  aul  its  frendz  dame.  Let  me  play  pedant  a mo- 
ment, and  try  : Jentlmen,  the  wurd  fonografy  iz  derived  from  too 
Greek  wurdz,  “fone”  a sound,  and  “grafe”  tu  rite.  It  meenz,  az 
yoo  redily  see,  tu  rite  by  sound.  Duz  it  make  eny  differens  tu  yoo 
how  I hav  speld  theez  wurdz  ; whether  with  ph  or  plane/?  So  ov  eny 
uther  wurd.  Filosofy  is  derived  ixomfilos  a luver,  and  sofia,  wizdom. 
Duz  it  make  eny  differens  tu  yoo  that  I hav  speld  the  wurdz  with 
an/insted  oy  ph  ? And  pray  tel  me  why  / iz  not  az  giid  Greek  az 
ph.  But  stil  suppoze  that  we  cannot  trase  tu  thare  orijin  a few  wurdz, 
how  meny  ov  the  reederz  ov  our  language  can  trase  them  az  they  now 
ar  speld  ? Not  wun  in  a thouzand  can  trase  a hundred  wurdz  tu  thare 
orijin  without  the  ade  ov  a dicshonary,  and  shal  we  perpetuate  the 
prezent  sistem  ov  speling  for  the  amuzement  or  gratificashon  ov  theez 
few  ? Language  iz  not  made  for  the  few  but  for  the  meny.  But  our 
prezent  speling  iz  quite  az  likely  tu  misleed  az  tu  leed  in  this  chase 
after  ansestry.  How  few  ov  our  pedigree  hunters  no  that  the  anshent 
way  ov  speling  sister,  woz  s-w-i-s-t-e-r.  Having  dropt  die  w in  sister, 
why  not  drop  it  in  sword  ? 

THE  MENTAL  DISIPLIN  OBJECSHUN. 

But  we  ar  told  that  lerning  tu  spel  iz  a grate  mental  disiplin.  It 
disiplinz  whot  ? The  reezo'ning  facultiz  ? No.  The  perseptiv  ? No. 
The  imajinativ?  No.  Nuthing  but  die  memory,  and  it  disiplinz  that 


7 


only  by  craming.  Haf  tbe  time  devoted  tu  acquiring  the  arbitrary 
method  ov  speling  wild  enable  die  pupil  tu  commit  haf  ov  Shakespere’z 
playz,  or  aul  ov  the  New  Testament  tu  memory.  It  iz  eny thing  but 
an  educator.  The  pupil  can  take  jeografy  or  arithmetic  and  study  it, 
but  no  man  iz  competent  tu  teech  hoo  wil  giv  a child  a speling  biik 
and  require  him  tu  study  a leson,  until  he  haz  had  yeerz  ov  instruc- 
shon.  Whot  can  eny  child  doo  without  the  oral  instrucshon  ov  the 
teecher  ? Only  think  ov  a child  poring  over  d-e-w — du  ; s-e-w — whot 
iz  that  ? It  iz  not  su.  Or  f-o-e — fo  ; s-h-o-e — whot  iz  that  ? It  iz  not 
sho  ; or  d-o-e-s — whot  iz  that  ? It  iz  not  doze  or  dooz.  Or  f-l-oo-r — 
y?ore ; f-oo-t— whot  iz  that  ? It  iz  not  fote.  Or  g-i-h-h-e-t—jibety  g-i-b- 
b-e-r — whot  iz  that?  It  iz  not  jiber  Beter  simplify  speling  so  that  it 
can  be  lernd,  and  then,  if  yoo  wont  mental  disiplin  and  hav  no  arith- 
metics or  jeometryz,  giv  yoor  child  a ches  b5rd  and  instruct  him  in 
ches,  or  let  him  commit  the  bible  tu  memory,  and  in  eether  case  yoo 
hav  beter  disiplin  than  the  speling  biik  can  posibly  giv. 


DUZ  SPELING  DISTINGWISH  MEENINGS  ? 


Akin  tu  this  historic  argument,  if  not  indeed  a part  ov  it,  iz  the  ob- 
jecshon  that  a uniform  method  ov  speling  wud  confound  the  meening 
ov  wurdz  pronounst  alike  but  speld  differently,  and  having  different 
meenings.  Ther  iz  absolutely  nuthing  in  this  when  properly  consid- 
erd.  Every  teecher  ov  children  noz  that  ov  aul  die  hard  things  re- 
quired ov  a child  in  lerning  tu  spel,  ther  iz  nuthing  harder  than  tu 
fix  upon  the  mind  theez  too  or  more  methodz  ov  speling  the  same 
wurd,  attaching  a different  meening  tu  eech,  unles  it  be  the  oppozit 
cruelty  ov  requiring  them  tu  sumtimez  caul  s-o-w — so,  and  sumtimez 
sou,  and  t-e-a-r  sumtimez  teer,  and  sumtimes  tare ; r-e-a-d  sumtimez 
reed,  and  sumtimez  red.  Not  wun  child  in  a thouzand  livz  in  such 
ignorans  az  not  tu  no  long  before  he  starts  tu  scool  that  the  word  are 
[air]  iz  sumtimez  uzed  tu  denote  wun  hoo  inherits,  and  aulso  tu 
designate  the  fluid  we  breeth,  and  he  neether  noz  nor  cares  how  it  iz 
speld,  and  he  never  cpnfoundz  the  meening  in  heering  or  speeking. 
The  truth  iz  this  distingshon  ov  meening  by  site  iz  wun  ov  the  hard- 
^ est  thingz  tu  acquire,  and  wun  ov  the  things  not  aulways  acquired 
even  by  men  ov  eminens  in  uther  wauks  ov  life  than  meer  wurd  bild- 
ing.  No  child  three  yeerz  old  ever  confoundz  the  sewing  his  muther 
duz  with  the  sowing  his  father  duz,  the  wun  in  the  hous  and  the  uther 
in  the  feeld.  No  man  duz,  until  by  long  driling  he  iz  compeld  tu. 
Take  the  foloing  : — “ Az  I rode  homewerd  at  a brisk  gate  in  a brasing 
are,  with  a hole  stake  in  my  basket — a chois  pees  ov  meet — a red  do 
with  glosy  hare  crost  the  rode  before  me,  and  a hare  sprang  from  its 


8 


hole  by  a stake.  The  farmer  woz  soing  wheet  from  a sak.  At  home 
I found  Mary  with  her  handz  in  do,  aultho  her  bo,  the  are  [heir]  ov 
ttie  late  Mr.  Jonez  woz  standing  by.  Jane  woz  soing  upon  a shert, 
and  Clara  widi  a butifiil  bo  pind  tu  her  new  sak  ran  tu  meet  me  at  the 
gate,  witii  a salutashon  ov  pees,  having  just  red  her  leson.”  Heer  ar 
therteen  parez  ov  wurdz  ov  the  same  sound  but  ov  diferent  significa- 
shon.  Doo  yoo  find  eny  confuzion  because  thay  ar  in  eech  case 
speld  alike  ? Needier  wild  yoo,  if  yoo  wer  tu  see  them  in  print,  if  yoor 
ie  had  not  bin  traned  at  grate  expens  tu  doo  so. 

INDIFERENS,  THE  GRATE  OBSTACL. 

A second  obstacl  in  the  way  ov  reforming  our  speling  iz  the  army 
ov  indiferent  peepl . Thay  doo  not  care  whot  it  costs  tu  obtane  an 
educashon.  Thay  hav  about  aul  thay  want,  or  at  least  aul  thay  ever 
expect  tu  get,  and  utherz  may  or  may  not  be  educated  ; whot  doo  thay 
care  ? This  iz  a formidabl  obstacl  if  numberz  ar  tu  count,  but  it  iz 
formidabl  5nly  by  its  vis  inertia.  By  and  by,  however,  when  the  re- 
form iz  wel  under  way,  and  sucses  iz  ashurd,  we  may  count  on  the 
wate  ov  thare  infliiens  if  it  iz  tu  cost  them  nuthing — no  thaut,  no 
time,  no  muny,  no  exershon  ov  eny  kind.  Then  thay  wil  not  only 
help  us  by  throing  the  wate  ov  thare  influens  with  us,  but  thay  wil 
dame  that  diay  aulways  wer  in  favor  ov  the  reform. 

Meenwhile  theez  facts  ar  patent  tu  aul : in  the  army  the  offiser 
hooz  speling  iz  scrupulusly  exact,  iz  more  likely  tu  be  a McClellan  or 
a Scott,  more  famus  for  diching  than  fiting,  tiian  tu  be  a Zach  Tay- 
lor, or  fiting  Jo  Hooker  hooz  bravery  winz  batlz.  The  Drewz  and 
die  Vanderbilts  needier  no  nor  care  diat  “money”  and  “darkey” 
ar  spelt  with  e-^/,  while  “penny”  and  “whisky”  end  with  plane  y. 
Speling  according  tu  Webster  iz  no  disgrase,  yet  confesedly  the  very 
exact  speler  remindz  yoo  ov  the  lawyer,  or  doctor,  or  preecher  hooz 
toilet  bespeeks  the  barber  and  the  bandbox  ; he  may  hav  grate  forse 
ov  caracter,  but  uzualy  he  haz  not. 

THE  OBSTACL  OV  A SELFISH  CONSERVATIZM. 

Ther  iz  a therd  obstacl  in  the  clas  aulredy  alluded  tu  ; very  respect- j 
abl  az  tu  numberz,  and  respectabl  enuf  in  caracter  az  die  wurld 
counts  respectability,  hoo  admit  the  dezirablnes  ov  die  reform  if  it 
ciid  be  accomplisht,  or  rather  if  it  had  bin  accomplisht  a hundred 
yeerz  ago,  so  that  they  did  hav  avaled  themselvz  ov  its  benefits  with- 
out eny  extra  expens  or  labor.  But  now  that  it  may  unsetl  them 
sumwhot,  and  iz  at  best  likely  tu  be  a long  and  tedius  job,  thay  beg 
tu  be  excuzed,  and  if  thay  must  take  sidez,  thay  think  it  eezier  tu 


9 


# 


take  sidez  with  the  majority,  and  say  thay  ar  oppozed  tn  the  reform. 
Thay  ar  not  the  Wilberforsez,  or  Clarksonz,  or  Fultonz,  or  Morsez  ov 
sosiety.  What  doo  thay  care  for  a blesing  that  iz  a grate  way  auf 
[off],  and  possiblj’’  not  attanabl  at  aul  ? Thay  care  nuthing  for  heven 
itself  while  it  seemz  remote,  and  its  pozeshon  impliez  sum  exershon 
on  thare  part  ; and  az  thay  liik  widi  pity  and  contemt  upon  the  man 
hoo  seemz  tu  hav  the  rewordz  ov  the  future  life  aulways  before  him, 
so  thay  affect  grate  contemt  for  the  vizionary  impracticablz  hoo  de- 
vote thaut  and  muny  tu  such  a wurk  az  reforming  eny  thing,  espeshaly 
so  intrensht  a rong  az  English  speling.  But  ov  such  must  be  no 
alumnus  ov  Asbury  University.  Hyer  and  nobler  purpusez  must 
moov  us. 

PEACTICAL  QUESTIONZ. 


Ther  ar  too  practical  questionz  before  us  relating  tu  this  subject ; 
the  ferst,  whot  iz  tu  he  dun ; and  the  second,  whot  can  we  doo^  which 
includez  a therd,  whot  aut  we  tu  doo ; for  we  aut  tu  doo  aul  we  can. 
In  anser  tu  the  ferst  question  I wild  say  diat  the  ultimate  object  must 
be  a uniform  sistem  ov  speling  by  a uniform  sistem  ov  caracterz,  suf- 
fishent  tu  reprezent  eech  distinct  sound.  But  neseserily  this  con- 
sumashon  must  be  very  distant.  Perhaps  at  prezent,  no  new  caracter 
shiid  be  introdust.  Whotever  iz  dun  shiid  be  avalabl  by  the  milionz 
hoo  cannot  redily  change  az  tu  the  mecanical  part  ov  riting.  It  shiid 
at  leest  be  opshunal  tu  uze  new  caracterz  or  new  combinashonz  ov 
old  caracterz.  If  the  yunger  shiid  be  taut  tu  rite  cheefly  or  holely 
with  new  caracterz,  ther  shiid  be  such  combinashonz  ov  the  familiar 
caracterz  that  older  peeple  may  uze  the  new  raethodz  ov  speling  with 
the  old  leterz,  and  uze  it  only  in  part  if  thay  prefer. 

Az  tu  the  second  question,  we  answer  that  the  ferst  thing  tu  be  dun 
iz  tu  cultivate  a profound  contemt  for  the  speling  biik.  Pedagogz  and 
printerz  hav  labord  for  ajez  with  too  much  sucses  tu  inculcate  the 
noshon  diat  speling  not  according  tu  Webster  iz  bad  speling,  and  that 
bad  speling  indicates  poor  scolarship,  and  in  jeneral  a wont  ov  repu- 
tabl  profeshonal,  or  soshal  standing.  This  iz  fauls,  absolutely  fauls, 
and  we  must  be  bold  tu  declare  it  fauls.  The  truth  iz  that  very  few 
ov  our  most  eminent  men  spel  even  tolerably  wel,  exept  at  the  expens 
ov  immens  labor  and  care.  Nuthing  iz  more  contemtibl,  therfore, 
than  tu  lisen  tu  the  disparajing  critisizm  which  scool  teecherz  and  tipe- 
seterz  ofen  indulge  in  upon  the  orthografy  ov  the  men  hoo  command 
our  armiz,  and  leed  our  senates,  and  direct  our  commers,  and  explore 
the  sienses,  and  expound  the  scriptures.  If  ther  iz  eny  thing  more 
contemtibl  it  iz  tu  lisen  tu  the  criticizm  ov  a clas  ov  very  smaul 
literary  men  hoo  join  in  the  refrane,  suppozing  that  thay  thareby 


10 


proclame  thare  on  gratenes.  Tu  be  a correct  speler,  according 
tu  our  prezent  standard,  indicates  tiiat  the  man  haz  bin  a teecher  ov 
children  or  a tipe-seter  aul  hiz  life,  or  tiiat  he  haz  an  extrordinary 
memory,  and  it  indicates  nuthing  more. 

When  the  intrepid  William  Tell  stiid  before  the  oppresor  ov  hiz  peo- 
ple, and  caring  not  a whit  for  himself  personaly,  liikt  the  tirant  fill  in 
the  fase  and  sed,  “I  hate  thee,  tirant,”  he  not  only  strengthened  hiz 
on  arm  and  the  armz  ov  hiz  felo  cuntrymen,  but  he  sent  a thril  ov 
teror  tu  the  hart  ov  the  tirant  himself.  The  wurld  ov  leterz,  lying  at 
the  feet  ov  the  speling  biik,  shiid  find  a William  Tell  in  every  educated 
man  hoo  shiid  defiantly  say,  “I  hate  thee,  tirant,”  and  bid  the  milionz 
folo  in  a rebelion  agenst  its  authority. 

HOW  KEFOEMZ  AR  EFFECTED. 

We  must  not  be  over  sangwin.  From  the  very  nature  ov  the  un- 
dertaking it  must  take  a considerabl  time  for  its  accomplishment. 
The  political  sentiment  which  constitutes  the  sentral  idea  ov  our 
Declarashon  ov  Independens  had  bin  groing  for  ajes  on  both  sidez 
ov  the  Atlantic  before  it  had  suffishently  cristalized  tu  becum  the 
basis  ov  a political  revoliishon.  The  Declarashon  came  at  last,  but 
that  only  cut  us  loos  from  the  muther  cun  try  ; it  did  not  giv  us  a 
reliabl  substitute.  It  tiik  yeerz  ov  wor,  and  then  yeerz  ov  debate  and 
experiment  before  we  had  a nashonal  existens,  and  ever  sins  the 
adopshon  ov  a constitushon  and  form  ov  government  we  hav  bin 
amending  and  revizing,  and  no  wun  wil  say  that  we  ar  yet  throo. 

Thus  in  this  revolushon.  The  groing  discontent  ov  the  ajez  culmi- 
nated in  Filadelfia  at  our  grate  sentenial  selebrashon,  during  which, 
eminent  men  of  leterz,  from  Canada,  England,  die  United  States  and 
uther  cuntryz  les  directly  interested,  met  tu  take  steps  for  utilizing 
and  directing  the  spirit  ov  discontent  which  had,  until  then,  bin  pow- 
erles  becauz  it  had  not  bin  consentrated.  Thay  organized  a sosiety 
and  agreed  tu  act  in  consert  az  far  az  consert  iz  practicabl,  and  it  iz 
safe  tu  say  that  no  similar  assosiashon  ever  gatherd  more  strength,  or 
develop!  more  promise  in  the  same  length  ov  time.  In  the  ferst  plase, 
the  thouzandz  hoo  hav  heertufore  acted  alone,  if  acting  at  aul,  now 
find  a senter  ov  simpathy  and  c5-operashon.  In  the  second  plase  the 
differensez  ov  opinion  ar  referd  tu  an  able  comitee  for  such  adjust- 
ment az  thay  may  be  able  tu  sudjest.  This  comitee  wil  not  act  arbi- 
trarily. Thay  probably  wil  not  sudjest  extreem  mezurez.  Thay 
wil  probably  sudjest,  az  die  ferst  step,  diat  every  nian  be  allowd 
tu  expres  hiz  contemt  ov  the  speling  biik  in  hiz  one  way.  That  iz, 
thay  wil  allow  every  man  to  spel  az  he  pleezez,  without  disparajing 


11 


hiz  literary  or  profeshonal  standing,  requiring  5nly  that  he  spel  sole 
and  hohy  and  hart  and  hare  and  aul  uther  wurdz  having  the  same 
vowel  sound  in  the  same  way,  regardles  ov  the  numerus  ways  dic- 
tated by  the  speling  buk.  Tho  diay  wil  undoutedly  conseed  that  ulti- 
mately every  distinct  sound  must  have  its  appropriate  representing 
caracter,  thay  ar  not  likely  tu  arbitrarily  introduse  new  caracterz  now, 
nor  tu  insist  upon  uniformity  at  prezent.  Tu  hav  demanded  at  the 
begining  ov  our  nashonal  exzistens  the  forms  ov  soshal,  political  and 
• relijus  life  now  obtaning,  wild  hav  bin  fatal  tu  our  political  life.  Meny 
a relic  ov  the  monarkyz  and  aristocrasyz  ov  the  old  wurld  wer  so  in- 
terwoven with  the  hole  fabric  ov  soshal,  political  and  relijus  life  that 
tu  hav  eradicated  them  sudenly  wild  hav  bin  tu  destroy  the  hole  ; so 
in  our  literary  life.  We  cannot  change  sudenly  from  wun  extreem 
tu  the  uther.  It  wil  be  yeerz  before,  under  the  most  favorabl  sercum- 
stansez,  we  can  hope  for  eny  thing  more  than  approximate  uniformity. 
For  that  matter,  after  hundredz  ov  yeerz  ov  experimenting  ther  iz  now 
no  universaly  recognized  standard  ov  orthografy.  But  when  it  duz 
cum  we  wil  hav  a sistem  which  wil  be  wurthy  the  American  peepl. 

INEESHIA  TU  BE  MET  BY  ACSHUN. 

For  meny  yeerz  we  must  expect  heer  and  thare  sum  hoo  wil  adheer 
tu  the  anshent  order  ov  things,  and  continue  tu  obay  the  speling  biik. 
We  wil  tolerate  aul  such,  az  we  tolerate  the  Jujez  ov  the  Federal 
Supreem  Cort  hoo  continue  tu  don  wigs  and  gounz  az  emblemz  ov 
offishal  life,  tho  we  may  despize  the  sily  attemt  tu  perpetuate  an 
effeet  sistem.  Only  this  much  must  we  require  ov  aul  hoo  wish  tu 
brake  the  yoke  ov  the  oppresor;  thay  must  uze  such  a combinashon  az 
wil  spel  die  given  wurd  and  nuthing  els.  Thus,  if  he  preferz  tu  spel 
the  wurd  “ dough  ” by  a shorter  method  let  it  be  d-o,  or  at  most  d-o-e. 
But  while  s-o  spelz  so,  d-o  shud  spel  do.  If  s-o  ever  spelz  so,  it  shiid 
always  spel  so,  dooing  away  with  s-e-w  and  s-o-w.  If  b-a-r-e  ever 
spelz  hare,  let  us  doo  away  with  b-e-a-r.  If  r-o-o-m  ever  spelz  room, 
let  us  doo  away  with  r-h-e-u-m,  and  so  on. 

On  diis  labor  ov  reform  we  must  count  upon  at  leest  the  negativ 
^oppozishon  ov  sum  literary  men  ov  fare  repute.  Thay  hav  worn  thare 
Wchanez  until  diay  hav  becum  sumwhat  accustomd  tu  them,  and  the 
decrepitude  ov  age,  no  les  than  thare  nativ  slugishnes,  iz  unfavorabl 
tu  change.  Habit  haz  much  tu  doo  with  sum  men’z  acts.  Meny  a 
prizoner  haz  preferd  the  sel  tu  freedom,  from  mere  habit,  az  meny  an 
old  slave  acsepted  freedom  with  a protest.  But  such  men  ar  not  made 
ov  the  stuf  that  makes  reformerz.  Very  meny  pas  throo  life  with  tol- 
erabl  respectability  if  not  with  sum  distincshun  becauz  thay  hav  bin 


content  tu  truge  along  in  liie  beeten  trak,  affecting  tu  despize  ffie 
restlesnes  ov  bolder  and  braver  men.  Thay  chuze  tu  caul  themselvz 
“ conservativz,  ” az  if  that  ment  sum  thing  very  respectabl,  and  thay 
caul  thoze  lioo  labor  tu  elevate  thare  felo  men  “fanatics,”  as  if  that 
ment  sumthing  very  dredfiil.  But  the  wurld  haz  ofen  bin  lifted  tu  a 
hyer  plane  by  fanatics,  and  the  children  ov  the  so  cauld  conservativz 
hav  never  faled  tu  bild  mouuments  tu  thoze  hoom  thare  conservativ 
fatherz  stoned  and  contemd. 

THE  KEFOEM  NOT  A NEW  WUN. 

But  after  aul,  this  enterprize  iz  nuthing  new.  It  iz  simply  an  effort 
tu  hasen  the  inevitabl  and  tu  reech  within  the  next  jenerashon — say 
within  a haf  sentury,  whot  mite  utherwize  require  senturyz.  Modifi- 
cashonz  ar  going  on  aul  the  time  and  hav  bin  for  hundredz  ov  yeerz. 
In  our  on  day  “honour”  haz  dropt  die  u,  and  “ traffick ” its /c,  and 
“traveller”  wun  ov  its  Tz,  and  “plough”  haz  becum  plow,  and 
“gaol,”jai/,  and  rneny  similar  chanjez  hav  bin  made.  Some 
ov  the  “conservativz,”  hoo  dred  the  exershon  which  a change  may 
require  ov  them,  becum  solisitus  ov  the  fate  ov  biiks  now  printed, 
if  the  new  form  ov  speling  iz  adopted.  Whot  wil  becum  ov  them  ? 
thay  ask.  We  anser,  just  whot  haz  becum  ov  Shakespere,  and  Milton, 
and  Bacon,  and  uther  biiks  hooz  ferst  edishonz  wer  printed  in  an 
orthografy  so  unlike  the  prezent  that  it  requirez  an  effort  tu  reed 
them.  Take  the  foloing  from  die  ferst  edishon  ov  the  authorized  ver- 
shon  ov  our  English  Bible.  “Give  eare  O yee  heauens  and  I will 
speake  ; and  heare  O earth.  My  doctrine  shall  drop  as  the  raine,  my 
speach  shall  distill  as  the  deaw,  as  the  smal  raine  upon  the  tender  herbe 
and  as  the  showers  upon  the  grasse.”  In  the  same  connecshon  we  hav 
r-o-c-k-e  for  rock,  w-o-r-k-e  for  work,  w-a-y-e-s  for  ways,  t-r-u-t-h-e  for 
truth,  and  so  on.  In  Tyndale’s  New  Testament  the  pronoun  “it”  is 
speld  in  8 different  wayz  ; it,  itt,  yt,  ytt,  hit,  hiti,  hyt,  hyit,.  Shakespere 
speld  pilgrim,  and  certain,  and  black,  and  again  with  a final  e.  We  hav 
abandond  the  orthografy  in  which  Shakespere’s  wurks  wer  riten,  yet 
hiz  wurks  remane.  So  it  wil  be  with  aul  the  biiks  now  on  the  shelvz. 
Such  az  caul  for  new  edishonz  wil  be  eezily  made  tu  conform  tu  the| 
new  stile  ov  speling. 

A HYER  MOTIV. 

But  ther  iz  a hyer  motiv  than  eny  ov  theez,  which  appeelz  tu  every 
American  scolar  in  behaf  ov  the  most  simpl  and  sientific  method  ov 
speling  our  wurdz.  The  ralerodez,  and  telegrafs,  and  steemships  ov 
the  wurld  ar  making  the  nashonz  ov  the  wurld  wun  in  interest  az  thay  ar 
becuming  wun  in  commers.  It  iz  the  English  speeking  nashonz  more 


13 


<hen  aul  utherz  that  ar  carrying  tiie  Gospel  tu  thoze  that  ar  without 
Christ,  and  az  diay  go  thay  cary  the  English  Bible.  Az  the  demandz 
ov  cominers  require  a universal  trade  language,  however  tenashusly 
the  several  nashonz  may  adheer  tu  thare  nativ  dialects  for  sum  pur- 
posez,  and  az  the  supremasy  ov  England  and  America  in  the  commers 
ov  the  wurld  haz  aulredy  made  the  English  language  that  universal 
trade  language,  so  the  nesesityz  ov  mishonary  laborz  require  a universal 
Cristian  language,  and  the  superior  zeel  ov  English  speeking  mish- 
ionaryz  point  tu  the  English  language  az  that  wun  Cristian  language. 
Our  nashonal  pride  no  les  than  our  Cristian  zeel  shiid  therfore  promt 
us  tu  make  our  language  az  eezily  acquired  as  posibl.  Our  irregular 
verbz  ar  bad  enuf,  but  when  it  cumz  tu  our  speling,  not  wun  in  ten 
thouzand  hoo  lernz  tu  speek  our  language  with  tolerabl  accurasy, 
lernz  tu  spel  or  reed  it  exept  with  grate  labor. 

DimCULTYZ  WHICH  BESET  FOBINEKZ . 

Let  US  imajin  a converted  heethen  seeking  tu  becum  acquanted 
with  the  language  ov  hiz  teecher,  and  cuming  tu  the  irregular  verb 
“to  doo.”  He  haz  aulredy  lernd  that  s-o  spelz  so,  and  g-o,  go;  hens 
he  wild  suppoze  that  d-o  shiid  spel  do,  but  he  iz  told  to  pronouns  it 
doo;  then  he  beginz  tu  conjugate,  “I  doo,  thou  dooest” — “No,  no,” 
sez  die  teecher,  “thou  dost.”  “Thou  dost”  sez  the  heethen,  “he 
doz” — No,  no,  sez  the  Cristian  teecher,  “he  duz.”  Having  lernd  that 
w-a-v-e  spelz  wave,  and  g-a-v-e  spelz  gave,  and  that  b-o-n-e  spelz  hone, 
and  s-t-o-n-e  spelz  stone,  he  starts  auf  [oif]  “I  have  done” — No,  no, 
sez  the  Cristian  teecher,  yoo  must  say  “I  hay  dun,”  and  he  sez  “I 
hav  dun  but  the  heethen  must  be  piusly  inclined  hoo  duz  not  inter- 
polate an  adjetiv  at  leest,  expressive  ov  disgust. 

Every  considerashon  dierfore,  w^hich  shiid  moov  a man  tu  acshon 
appeelz  tu  us  tu  hasen  the  day  when  our  language  shal  be  speld  as  it  iz 
pronounst — speld  by  the  fewest  posible  leterz,  omiting  aul  silent  leterz, 
Anglisizing  the  speling  ov  aul  forin  wurdz  that  seek  adopshon  intu 
our  language,  az  d-e-p-o  for  depot,  c-o-m-i-l-f-o  for  comme  it  faut,  and 
so  on,  adopting  for  the  prezent  the  most  natural  and  uzual  w^ay  ov 
designating  the  several  soundz  ov  the  several  vowelz,  az  jeneraly  the 
long  sound  by  a final  e,  az  s-o-l-e,  h-o-p-e,  g-a-t-e,  m-u-t-e,  ets.,  and 
for  the  prezent  abstaning  from  new  caracterz,  and  new  and  unuzual 
combinashonz.  Our  personal  cumfort,  and  the  cumfort  ov  our  chil- 
dren and  naborz,  the  interest  ov  the  heethen  hoo  liik  tu  us  for  the 
Gospel,  and  the  interests  ov  commers  which  demand  at  leest  wun 
common  language  in  aul  the  marts  ov  trade,  aul,  aul,  appeel  tu  us. 
Az  literary  men  ov  hy  amez  yoo  dare  not  be  indiferent. 


14 


HOW  WIL  IT  LTJK  ? 

In  concluding  I wil  consider  only  wun  more  objecshon  tu  the  pro- 
pozed  reform,  and  I wil  conseed  that  it  iz  the  most  formidabl  ov  anl 
— realy  the  only  wun  that  standz  in  the  way.  How  wil  it  luk  ? The 
question  iz  not,  “How  wil  it  wurk,”  or  “How  wil  it  sound,”  but, 
“How  wil  it  liik.”  The  botom  truth  iz  that  it  iz  “aul  in  the  ie”  at 
last.  No  wun  mistakes  the  meening  ov  wurdz  spoken,  yet  ten  thou- 
zand  wurdz  ar  spoken  tu  wun  that  iz  red.  In  anser  tu  the  question 
I must  admit  that  at  ferst  it  wil  liik  aukwerd,  and  in  meny  casez  realy 
offensiv  tu  the  cultivated  ie.  But  shal  the  milionz  be  kept  in  bondage 
becauz  a few  wild  be  piit  tu  a temporary  inconveniens  in  the  meer 
mater  ov  liiks  ? 

“How  duz  it  liik”  sed  the  aristocratic  farasee  ov  too  thouzand 
yeerz  ago,  when  Christ  ate  with  publicans  and  sinerz.  That  woz 
sumthing  new  and  abhorent  tu  thare  educashon.  “ How  wil  it  liik  tu 
hav  a funeral,  or  a weding,  of  a meer  informal  caul  without  wine  ?” 
sed  the  fashonable  objector  tu  temperans,  fifty  yeerz  ago.  “How wil 
it  liik  tu  see  negroz  voting  and  siting  on  juryz?”  sed  the  objector  tu 
the  enfranchizment  ov  negroz  les  dian  twenty  yeerz  ago.  “How  wil 
it  liik  tu  see  wimen  in  colejez  by  the  side  ov  thare  brutherz,  and  then 
in  storez,  and  shops,  and  die  lerned  profeshonz?”  askt  the  incorijibl 
churl  hoo  dreded  wiiman  equolity,  a quorter  ov  a sentury  ago.  Nun 
ov  theez  thingz  liik  intolerabl  now  that  we  hav  becum  familiar  with 
them.  The  appeerans  ov  the  bel  ov  the  period  with  her  “ ty-bak  ” ov 
tu-day,  upon  the  street  or  in  the  drawing-room  twenty  yeerz  ago,  just 
az  we  had  becum  sumwhot  reconciled  to  the  enormus  hoops  ov  that 
day,  wiid  hav  created  alarm  and  probably  wiid  hav  rezulted  in  her 
ejectment  from  sosiety  ; but  litl  by  litl  she  haz  stolen  upon  us  until 
we  haf  admit  that  ty-baks  ar  handsum,  and  we  wunder  that  enybody 
ever  wore  such  outlandish  skerts  az  the  fashon  plates  ov  twenty  yeerz 
ago  indicate. 

So  shal  it  be  with  the  future  speling.  Introdust  sudenly  it  wiid  liik 
horibl ; but  ther  ar  children  now  at  scool  hooz  children  wil  wunder 
that  eny  peepl  ever  speld  az  we  doo  now.  The  wurk  iz  wun  ov  yeerz, 
but  it  wil  be  accomplisht. 

Our  cheef  object  in  comensing  the  publicashon  ov  the  Speling 
Refoemek,  woz  tu  furnish  a sucseshon  ov  tracts  on  Speling  Reform, 
which  wiid  be  purchest  by  thoze  frendly  tu  the  cauz,  and  distributed 
amung  teecherz  and  uther  influenshal  personz.  In  pursuans  ov  this 
object,  we  hav  publishtfiiis  munth  the  adres  ovthe  Rev.  T.  A.  Goodwin 
on  “The  Duty  ov  Literary  Men,”  and  we  hope  it  wil  be  orderd  in 


15 


quontitiz  by  our  frendz  for  the  purpus  ov  awakening  or  deepening  an 
interest  in  this  grate  educashonal  topic.  We  will  furnish  the  Addres  at 
50  sents  a duzen.  Mr.  Goodwin  haz  orderd  a thouzand,  and  haz  aulso 
had  an  exelent  fonetic  heading  made,  for  printing  at  the  top  ov  biznes 
leterz  and  showing  hiz  ideaz  ov  the  best  method  ov  reform. 

The  April  Number  wil  contane  short  articles  ov  Newz,  Notisez  ov 
Speling  Reform  Publicashonz,  A Few  Wordz  from  Isaac  Pitman,  Reso- 
lushons  past  at  the  Forth  Quorterly  Meeting  ov  the  S.  R.  A. , New  Propo- 
• (J^zishonz,  Critisizmz,  Personals  and  Speshaltiz,  etc.,  etc.,  making  a livly 

number  for  our  reederz.  

DETH  TU  INOVASHONZ. 

From  a comunicashon  printed  foneticaly  in  **Bloomingdale  Tidings,''  Mich. 

‘‘Doutles  meny  ov  yoor  reederz  hav  had  thare  sens  ov  propriety 
shokt  by  the  speling  ov  yoor  corespondent,  and  sum  ar  dispozed  tu 
make  mery  over  it.  Very  wel.  History  recordz  that  the  sajez  ov  olden  . 
timez  wer  wont  tu  ridicule  and  lampoon,  ay,  persecute  eech  ov  thoze 
grand  old  inventorz,  Copernicus,  Galilio,  Stephenson.  Fulton,  Morse, 

. and  Garrison,  az  eech  in  turn  dared  tu  stand  by  reezon  and  rite.  It 
woz  this  same  spirit  ov  naro  minded  bigotry  and  prejudis  that  gave 
us  the  seen  on  Calvary,  that  animated  die  torturez  ov  the  Spanish  In- 
quizishon,  that  renderd  infamus  the  rane  ov  ‘ Bludy  Mary,  ’ that  burnd 
a Cranmer,  that  shot  a Lovejo3%  that  murderd  a Lincoln.  No  mater 
how  inconsistent,  torturus,  or  burdensum  may  be  a time  onord 
custom,  eny  propozed  change  or  releef  iz  regarded  with  distrust, 
avershon,  and  horor.  ‘ Deth  tu  inovashonz  !’  iz  the  wochwurd. 

But  then  even  wize  hedz  may  err  in  judgment.  ‘It  can’t  be  dun, 
ser  ! Yoo  ar  a fool,  ser !’  sed  Ser  Humphrey  Davy — himself  no  novis 
in  siens — tu  the  man  hoo  ferst  propozed  tu  lite  the  streets  ov  London  by 
gas.  ‘ The  felo  iz  mad — insane  ’ sed  the  English  Lordz  when  Stephen- 
son announst  hiz  beleef  in  the  ability  ov  hiz  locomotiv  tu  run  12  milez 
an  our.  An  English  Revew  spoke  thus  about  the  same  time  : ‘ What 
can  be  more  palpably  ridiculus  than  the  prospect  held  out  ov  locomo- 
tivz  traveling  twise  az  fast  az  stage  cochez?’  And  aul  this  scarsely 
more  than  fifty  yeerz  ago.  And  so,  jentlmen,  the  orthografic  lever  iz 
^^wurking  ; a day  ov  rashonal  speling  iz  dauning.  Its  progres  may  be 
^^slo,  but  no  puny  strength  ov  yoorz  iz  able  tu  blok  the  wheelz  ov 
progres.”  A.  J.  Pierce,  So.  Haven,  Mich. 

A.  J.  Pierce,  formerly  ov  the  “Normal  Herald  ” in  which  fiie  Anglo- 
American  print  woz  tested  three  yeerz  ago,  sendz  us  3 subscripshonz, 
saying,  “ I cannot  doo  without  the  Speling  Reformer.”  He  haz  aulso 
had  postal  cards  printed  with  a few  lines  ov  fonetic  speling. on  them. 


SPELLING  BEFOEM  ASSOCIATION. 


President.— FRANCIS  A.  MARCH,  LL.  D.,  Lafayette  Colle^,  Easton,  Pa. 
Vice-Presidents. 

S.  S.  HALDEMAN\,  LL.  D.,  University  of  Penn.,  Chickies,  Pa. 

W.  D.  WHITNEY:  LL.  D..  Yale  College,  New  Haven,  Conn. 

Hon.  W T.  HARRIS,  LL.  D.,  St.  Louis,  Missouri. 

C.  K.  NELSON,  D.  D.,  Annapolis,  Maryland. 

E.  JONES,  B.  A.,  Liverpool,  Eng. 

ELIZA  BOARDMAN  BURNZ,  53  Park  Row,  New  York. 

Secretary. — MELVIL  DEWEY,  P.  O.  260,  Boston. 

Treasurer  and  Corresponding  Secretary. — Prof.  E.  H.  BARLOW,  Easton,  Pa. 


The  Spelling  Reform  Association  was  organized  at  Philadelphia,  in  August,  1870.  Its 
purposes  are  best  stated  in  the  second  article  of  its  constitution. 

“ The  object  of  this  Association  shall  be  the  simplification  of  English  orthography.  To 
this  end  it  will  secure  the  delivery  of  addresses,  publish  articles,  circulate  books,  pamphlets 
and  charts  ; endeavor  to  introduce  the  reform  in  schools,  and  in  all  proper  waj^s,  as  far  as 
the  means  at  its  disposal  will  allow,  will  urge  the  matter  upon  the  attention  of  the  people.” 

The  Association  now  numbers  hundreds,  and  includes  many  of  the  leading  scholars  and 
educational  men  of  the  country.  Much  work  has  been  already  accomplished,  and  it  is 
very  desirable  that  the  friends  of  this  great  Reform  should  show  their  faith  by  adopting  a 
few,  if  not  all,  of  the  new  spellings,  at  once.  The  words  “ In  Revised  Spelling,”  written 
at  the  top  of  a letter  sheet,  will  show  that  any  departure  from  the  usual  orthography  is 
due  to  a desire  to  help  reform  its  many  anomalies  and  absurdities. 

A FEW  RULES  FOR  NEW  SPELLINGS. 

I. — Omit  a from  the  digraf  ea  when  pronounst  as  e-.short,  as  In  hed,  helth,  etc.j  2. — Omit 
silent  e after  a short  vowel,  as  in  hav,  giv,  etc.  3. — Write/ for  ph  in  such  wotdk  as  alfabet, 
fantom,  etc.  4. — When  a word  ends  with  a double  letter,  omit  the  last,  as  in  shal,  clif,  eg, 
etc.  5. — Change  ed  final  to  t where  it  has  the  sound  of  t,  as  in  lasht,  imprest,  etc. 
6. — Uze  z for  s when  s has  the  sound  of  2. 


The  spelling  used  in  printing  this  address  is  conformable  to  the 
above  suggestions,  and,  further,  to  what  is  known  as  the  Anglo- 
American  basis,  namely,  “useless  letters  are  omitted,  and  the  letters 
and  combinations  of  letters  of  the  common  alphabet  are  employed  with 
their  most  usual  signification.”  Mute  e is  retained  after  a consonant 
only  when  it  denotes  that  the  preceding  vowel  is  long.  Marked  letters 
or  vowel  digrafs  are  employed  when  this  lengthener  is  not  available. 
In  cases  of  doubtful  pronunciation,  preference  is  given  to  the  present 
spelling,  subject  to  future  decision.  The  Anglo-American  so  much 
resembles  the  common  print  and  script,  that  its  introduction  into 
general  use  for  printing  and  correspondence  will  occasion  no  confu- 
sion to  ordinary  readers.  But  this  present  spelling  does  not  profess 
to  be  authoritative,  only  tentative  and  suggestive,  to  be  changed  on 
further  trial,  if  thought  best.  For  further  information  and  docu- 
ments, address  (with  stamp), 

Mrs.  E.  B.  BUBNZ, 

Spelling  Kefoem  Booms,  33  Paek  Bow,  New  Yobk. 


Issued  Monthly,  ‘ ‘ The  Speling  Reformer.”  Subscription,  50  cents 
per  yeer.  Buenz  & Co.,  Fublisherz,  New  York, 


